Pages

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

It was not the media who hijacked the Second Vatican Council

Reactions 
Theory of the Hijacked Council interesting response to the Pope's comments on the Council saying the media hijacked the Council.

The whole speech to the clergy of the Diocese of Rome


To quote the great litany of the article
It was not the media who asked for a Council to open up the Church to the modern world, but Pope John XXIII.

It was not the media who rejected the prepared schemata drafted the Preparatory Commission, but the Council Fathers.

It was not the media who cut the power to Cardinal Ottaviani's microphone when he protested, but the Council Fathers.

It was not the media who drove the progressive agenda of the Council, but the Council advisors, the periti, such as Hans Kung and Karl Rahner.

It was not the media who appointed the periti, but the Bishops, and in some cases (Kung), the pope himself.
It was not the media who were enamored with the teachings of such dissenting theologians as Rahner, Kung and de Chardin, but the Bishops and theologians of the Church.

It was not the media who failed to put an end to the Council even after it was evident from Session 1 that it had gotten out of control, but Pope Paul VI. (Cathcon- St Padre Pio told a representative of the Vatican to get the thing over quickly).

It was not the media who drafted documents that Benedict XVI himself describes as "dense " and "weak", but the Council Fathers (see here).

It was not the media who promulgated a document that Benedict XVI said was "too naturalistic and unhistorical, took insufficient notice of sin and its consequences, and was too optimistic about human progress", but the Council Fathers.

It was not the media who drafted an intentionally ambiguous document on the inspiration and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures, which dissident theologians have been able to twist to deny the Bible's authority, but the Council itself.

It was not the media who called for a new Mass despite the fact that the Council never called for a New Mass, but the Church itself acting under a Commission of Bishops established by the Pope.

It was not the media who entrusted the creation of this New Mass to a man commonly believed to be a Freemason (Msgr Bugnini), but Pope Paul VI.

It was not the media who, in the words of Benedict XVI, "introduced a breach into the history of the liturgy whose consequences could only be tragic" with the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Mass, but Pope Paul VI (Milestones, pg. 146-149).

It was not the media who illegally suppressed celebrating Mass according to the 1962 Mass despite the fact that it was "never abrogated" (SP Art. 1), but the Bishops of the Church, most of them also Council Fathers.

It was not the media who promulgated heretical catechisms after the Council with modernist interpretations of the faith, but regional councils of Catholic bishops.

It was not the media who forced the Church to abandon Latin despite the fact that the Council did not call for this, but Bishops.

It was not the media who compelled the pope to give up the papal coronation and tiara and substitute them for an "inauguration", suggesting a democratic Church, but the pope himself.

It was not the media who instituted practices like communion in the hand, altar girls, extraordinary ministers and rock music during Mass, but liturgical experts working for the Church, appointed and supported by Bishops, whose abuses were later authorized by the papacy itself.

It was not the media who insisted on destroying and dismantling historic churches, but parish committees working in conjunction with parish priests with the support of the local bishops, who insisted on such measures as appropriate for the modern Church.

It was not the media who insisted on harsh disciplinary measures against priests and bishops who wished to maintain Catholic Tradition while simultaneously failing to sufficiently discipline dissenting theologians, Catholic colleges that fomented modernism and radical feminism, and whole dioceses mired in liberation theology, but the papacy itself.

It was not the media who screened orthodox aspirants to the priesthood out of the seminaries while encouraging the ordination of homosexuals, but the diocesan bureaucracies.

It was not the media who turned these diocesan bureaucracies over to lay people and dissenting religious, but the Bishops themselves, who voluntarily abdicated their responsibility based on an erroneous understanding of Vatican II's call for greater lay participation.

It was not the media who insisted that Catholic universities hand over control from religious orders to lay persons, but the Bishops and religious orders themselves, as in the case of Notre Dame where this was done in the name of Vatican II.

It was not the media who promised to starve the Catholic Church into accepting married priests by intentionally turning away seminarians, but liberal Catholic bishops, like Kenneth Untener of Saginaw, MI. (1980-2004), who did in fact make such a statement.

It was not the media who confused the faithful about the Church's teaching on issues such as abortion and homosexuality, but dissenting priests and bishops who preached error or refused to correct error when it was preached.

It was not the media who moved tabernacles from their position of centrality and banished them to broom closets, but Catholic priests acting with the tacit or explicit approval of Catholic Bishops.

It was not the media who turned many liturgies throughout the 80's, 90's and even today into horrendous displays of egotism, sacrilege and blasphemy, but Catholic priests operating either with the blessing of their Bishops or without their active opposition.

It was not the media who wrote banal, faith-destroying pop music for our liturgies, but Catholic musicians, many of them priests.

It was not the media who taught that the Church's missionary mandate no longer applies to the Orthodox, but a conference of Catholic bishops at Balamand.

It is not the media who are undermining the Church's missionary mandate by teaching that conversion to the Faith is no longer necessary for salvation, but Catholic missionary orders and organizations who openly teach such things and do so in the name of the Second Vatican Council.

It was not the media who confused the Catholic faithful by kissing the Koran, praying in synagogues and mosques, and attending reprehensible pagan ceremonies, but Pope John Paul II.

It was not the media who taught the Catholic faithful indifferentism by gathering leaders of all the worlds religions to pray for worldly concerns, but Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI at the Assisi meetings.
It was not the media who have failed to "clean up corruption in the Curia", but the popes.

It is not the media who have failed to address the growing "homoheresy" and "Lavender Mafia" within the Church, but the popes.

It was not the media who systematically covered up homosexual abuse within the Church hierarchy, but the Catholic bishops.

It is not the media who fosters these continuing misunderstandings of the Second Vatican Council, but the Catholic Bishops and the Pope who collectively and individually have failed to offer authoritative guidelines for understanding the Council and allow such things as listed above to go on year after year.

Finally, it was not the media who appointed all of the liberal, progressive and modernizing Bishops and Cardinals who have done such things, but the Popes themselves. Cathcon- ironically the most out-of-date document of the Council is the second document issued on the Media of Social Communications, Inter Mirifica

5 comments:

Aged parent said...

Brilliant, sir. Well said.

JAK said...

Thank you for this. Forthright and truthful.

Nick said...

I want to add that it was not the media that refused to address "The Errors of Russia," namely Communism, at the Council, but the Council Bishops themselves.

James Kohn said...

BRAVO! BRAVO! ENCORE, ENCORE!

John said...

It WAS the media who eagerly and stubbornly exploited every opportunity listed here as a means to thrash the Church.

It WAS the media who eagerly pounded away at the Church for every little moral concern possible that didn't conform to the secular agenda.

It WAS the media who practically worshipped the Kennedys and several other allegedly Catholic politicians.

It WAS the media who celebrated the thrashing of sexual mores in public life for 40 or 50 years, damning any and all who objected.

It WAS the media who committed the ultimate in hypocrisy and betrayal by stubbornly advocating homosexual behavior, then refused to admit it when sex scandals began to break.

It WAS the media who adamantly refused to even report on the idea that homosexual intentions had any correlation to the same abuse scandals.

It WAS the media who've relentlessly hounded orthodox priests, bishops, and lay faithful who've dared to make anything resembling a public stand for morals.

It WAS the media who ultimately participated in the secular assault on the existence of religion in the public square.


I could say a few things about certain die-hard traditional attitudes within the Church too, but I won't.

If you want to have a debate about the merits of Vatican II, then fine, let's have the debate.

But if you insist that all the Church's problems come about because we had a Council for three years, if you insist on ignoring the role the media have obviously played, I don't think you're really adding anything to the state of affairs.